Lyla Wolfenstein

hi - i just received a request for feedback on this article:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124119468


i responded with the following (and first i posted a different article: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200703/trashing-teens

i would love feedback on my feedback, from the perspectives on this list, and just feedback in general on either article. i felt really annoyed by the npr article and have had so many incredible experiences with unschooled teens in the last few days, in particular, that i just feel really defensive and protective of teens in general right now:


k i just read the article and i must admit...it rubbed me the wrong way. 2 years ago i would have agreed with it completely. i don't anymore. the science sounded "shoddy" to me - or rather the interpretations - like, they gave no stats about adult car accidents vs teen accidents - they just described a teen turning in front of traffic as if that's evidence for the theory. i do agree that teen brains are probably less developed in some areas, but as the article itself says, also more attuned to learning, and more "advanced" in some ways. the more i have observed teens who are not raised "typically", (and yes, by that i do mean immersed in school culture, even if home is more progressive or connected), the more i deviate from the assumptions like this

"This also may explain why teenagers often seem so maddeningly self-centered. "You think of them as these surly, rude, selfish people," Jensen says. "Well, actually, that's the developmental stage they're at. They aren't yet at that place where they're thinking about - or capable, necessarily, of thinking about the effects of their behavior on other people. That requires insight."

i think there is an element of being self-centered, in the sense that they are very focused on the tasks of their own development, but i just know so many teens now who are not surly, rude OR selfish people and are in fact, incredibly compassionate, connected, attuned, and selfless in daily practice.

i also think things like getting caught with pot, or doing poorly on academics or "Like when son number one, Andrew, turned 16, dyed his hair black with red stripes and went off to school wearing studded leather and platform shoes. And his grades went south." are not inherently signs of immature frontal lobes, but perhaps more often signs of differing priorities, and misaligned (with the adult world) focus. it's quite age-centric to presume that WE know better what they SHOULD and should not be doing/exploring/experiencing.

the other article i posted actually disputes a lot of these truisms about teens. i also wonder if atypically raised teens may experience more rapidly developing frontal lobes due to exposure to more choice making, experience, and exploration opportunities, as well as assumptions of capability. that's just something i've been pondering...the research i 've seen says the frontal lobe develops between 14 and 31, so some 14 year olds would then have fully developed frontal lobes...

lyla

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jenny Cyphers

"This also may explain why teenagers often seem so maddeningly self-centered. "You think of them as these surly, rude, selfish people," Jensen says. "Well, actually, that's the developmental stage they're at. They aren't yet at that place where they're thinking about - or capable, necessarily, of thinking about the effects of their behavior on other people. That requires insight."

That is such complete and utter BS!  I didn't read the article yet.  Did it really say that?  Surly, rude, and selfish, could easily be seen as a direct reaction to the complete lack of control that most teens, young people, feel.  I know plenty of really great teens, even some that go to school that do act surly, rude, and selfish to their parents because their parents are surly, rude, and selfish to them.  The parents that I know that are like this are completely unaware that they are being surly, rude, and selfish, they mostly feel like they are the parents doing their parenting "job" and their kids are bad.  Those same kids are sweet and kind and generous to me.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lyla Wolfenstein

yes that was a direct quote. i am glad you agree with me that that is BS - i hate that this stuff is out there- masquerading as insightful and forgiving...

lyla

***************

That is such complete and utter BS! I didn't read the article yet. Did it really say that? Surly, rude, and selfish, could easily be seen as a direct reaction to the complete lack of control that most teens, young people, feel. I know plenty of really great teens, even some that go to school that do act surly, rude, and selfish to their parents because their parents are surly, rude, and selfish to them. The parents that I know that are like this are completely unaware that they are being surly, rude, and selfish, they mostly feel like they are the parents doing their parenting "job" and their kids are bad. Those same kids are sweet and kind and generous to me.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=-i am glad you agree with me that that is BS - i hate that this
stuff is out there- masquerading as insightful and forgiving...-=--

But if, as so many people believe, school is a natural part of life,
then schooled-teen-behavior is natural
If homework is inevitable, then the results of and reactions to
parents forcing kids to do homework, with punishments, loss of
privilege, shame... that all becomes "normal"--natural.

(There's some potential for insight and forgiveness for people who
think it's right and true.)

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Michele K

But there is one aspect of truth in the quote, right? That we are less capable of considering the effects of our behavior on others when we're younger. I am watching that ability -- to consider another person's point of view -- develop in my children. My 3 year old is completely focused on the here and now and what he's doing. I don't see any understanding from him when I point out something like, "When you head butt your sister, it hurts her." My 6 year old seems to realize only after she has done something that it might have an affect on someone else. (Not coming up with a good example, but I know I have noticed this.) My 8 year old is just beginning to think beforehand. She and I have had discussions about it (initiated by her; she's verbally precocious). It reminds me of Piaget's cognitive stages.

Michele, mom of Rhiannon 8, Caroline 6, and Ian 3
Learning, Laughing, Snuggling, Scrapping
My Digital Scrapbook Pages





________________________________
From: Jenny Cyphers <jenstarc4@...>

"This also may explain why teenagers often seem so maddeningly self-centered. "You think of them as these surly, rude, selfish people," Jensen says. "Well, actually, that's the developmental stage they're at. They aren't yet at that place where they're thinking about - or capable, necessarily, of thinking about the effects of their behavior on other people. That requires insight."

That is such complete and utter BS! ... ...




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lyla Wolfenstein

++++++++
But if, as so many people believe, school is a natural part of life,
then schooled-teen-behavior is natural
If homework is inevitable, then the results of and reactions to
parents forcing kids to do homework, with punishments, loss of
privilege, shame... that all becomes "normal"--natural.

(There's some potential for insight and forgiveness for people who
think it's right and true.)

Sandra

++++++++++

yes, but also some food for thought for those considering unschooling before their kids reach teenage years, or even when they are already showing these signs. i have seen transformation in my teen in the 2 years since leaving school, from fitting that description in the article, to absolutely positively NOT fitting it at all. i don't know if all teens are "recoverable" that way, but mine certainly was, thank goodness.

lyla

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jenny Cyphers

***(There's some potential for insight and forgiveness for people who
think it's right and true.)***

I've been thinking about that a lot recently! Here's the thing for me.... My parents felt it was good and necessary to go to school and get a diploma, yet they weren't unkind and forceful and shaming like most of the parents that I've met. So, while I can forgive parents who think that it's perfectly right and normal to send their kids off to school, I find it harder to forgive parents who are just plain mean about it.

I really don't understand the dismissive behavior of parents towards teenagers. It just feels wrong to me on so many levels. Finding "scientific" data to promote that division of teenagers and adults plays right into that. I'd rather see teenagers as people, since they are.

So, even though I don't like what schools do and how parents buy into it, I do have friends with kids in school, who ARE nice to their kids and don't buy into this kind of scientific data. It was clear from the article that the mom must have done something right, even though she was promoting this data, since her son is still willing to talk to her and be a part of her life! The comments though, are another story entirely... lots of really rude and ignorant parents there, reading that and justifying their rudeness!





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Lyla Wolfenstein

But there is one aspect of truth in the quote, right? That we are less capable of considering the effects of our behavior on others when we're younger. I am watching that ability -- to consider another person's point of view -- develop in my children. My 3 year old is completely focused on the here and now and what he's doing. I don't see any understanding from him when I point out something like, "When you head butt your sister, it hurts her." My 6 year old seems to realize only after she has done something that it might have an affect on someone else. (Not coming up with a good example, but I know I have noticed this.) My 8 year old is just beginning to think beforehand. She and I have had discussions about it (initiated by her; she's verbally precocious). It reminds me of Piaget's cognitive stages.

*********************



i agree, about younger kids - but this is about teens, who, for much of history in throughout most of the world, were married and raising children a full decade younger than most western women today - sometimes 2 or 3 decades younger. i have seen HUGE leaps in frontal lobe capacity in my nearly 15 year old just in the last 6 months. i attribute it to "finishing" the process of deschooling (can't think of a different way to say that, although i know it's not precise), rather than her age. i have seen younger teens than her, lifelong unschoolers, who accomplished that degree of frontal lobe "abilities" by 13 or 14, many who would never consider the risky behaviors outlined in the article, would never have to deal with the school imposed "failures" or pressures, and are never rude or surly, or at least not more, and usually less than the average adult, and not because they fear reprisal or punishment, but because of the relationships they have with those around them. that trashing teen articles gives many other perspectives about teens and their capabilities...


lyla

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joanna

> i agree, about younger kids - but this is about teens, who, for much of history in throughout most of the world, were married and raising children a full decade younger than most western women today - sometimes 2 or 3 decades younger. i have seen HUGE leaps in frontal lobe capacity in my nearly 15 year old just in the last 6 months. i attribute it to "finishing" the process of deschooling (can't think of a different way to say that, although i know it's not precise), rather than her age. i have seen younger teens than her, lifelong unschoolers, who accomplished that degree of frontal lobe "abilities" by 13 or 14, many who would never consider the risky behaviors outlined in the article, would never have to deal with the school imposed "failures" or pressures, and are never rude or surly, or at least not more, and usually less than the average adult, and not because they fear reprisal or punishment, but because of the relationships they have with those around them. that trashing teen articles gives many other perspectives about teens and their capabilities...
>
>
> lyla

Yes--I agree with all you've written about teens, and have experienced this with my own--14 1/2. And yet, I don't discount the first article entirely. What I disagree with is all of the interpretation around it. I see, played out in front of me, my son almost literally bouncing back and forth between his prefrontal cortex and other, more reactionary parts of his brain. Not unlike adults do, but maybe in a more dramatic way.

I think unschooled teens, in general, have way more support for developing these faculties, whereas many schooled, where housed, age-lumped (dumped?) kids are trying to make their way without adult modeling.

The first article makes a case for the teen brain being "different" from the adult brain, and not just a younger model with "less miles." And then they go on to say that the teen brain is just like the adult brain, but with less myelination in the prefrontal lobes. Well, isn't that saying that the teen brain is an adult brain with "less miles on it?" I think that's the basic misdrawn conclusion--they contradicted themselves, and then ran away with a faulty conclusion. THAT is bad science!!!

I don't think that it is at all a case of either or between the two articles. Under the surface, I think the "facts" actually mesh just fine. But there is an awful lot laid on top of article one that seems to "support" the modern interpretation of what it means to be a teenager that those of us with unschooled teens know is bunk.

Joanna

Jenny Cyphers

***But there is one aspect of truth in the quote, right? That we are less capable of considering the effects of our behavior on others when we're younger. I am watching that ability -- to consider another person's point of view -- develop in my children.***

Right, really young children go through that. My youngest is 8 and is just really beginning to understand that. My oldest seemed to get it much earlier, closer to the age of 4 or 5.

There have been all kinds of studies on the human brain, children's brains, teenage brains, young adult, old folks, etc. The thing about all the studies that I've seen or heard about that involve the teenage brain, is that there is this underlying idea that something is "wrong" with their brains and they are attempting to discover why. If you don't accept that there is something wrong with a teenager's brain to begin with, the studies come off as a little askew.

Sure, a young person's brain is different. I suspect that one of the main differences is the biological focus on human reproduction has a huge part to do with why a young person's brain is different than a middle aged person's brain. Every thing a young person does, has to do with human reproduction, the self discovery, the grooming practices, the social networking, all of that is designed to connect with other humans.

A middle aged person's brain is much more focused on preservation. Since the focuses are so very different it would naturally follow that their brains are different, are making different connections. Neither is better than the other, the stages a person's brain goes through, is necessary to how humans survive.

Scapegoating a teenagers brain, to come up with conclusions as to why they do "dumb" things, leaves little understanding of why people's brains DO do what they do. The correlation of doing "dumb" things could be a symptom of other things entirely, like the given environment that the individual is reacting and responding to. Since most teenagers in our culture are in environments that are almost entirely controlled by others, it seems like there is much more of an environmental factor that should be considered when examining their brain functions. It's this missing element that I most object to.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jenny Cyphers

***The first article makes a case for the teen brain being "different" from the adult brain, and not just a younger model with "less miles." And then they go on to say that the teen brain is just like the adult brain, but with less myelination in the prefrontal lobes. Well, isn't that saying that the teen brain is an adult brain with "less miles on it?" I think that's the basic misdrawn conclusion-- they contradicted themselves, and then ran away with a faulty conclusion. THAT is bad science!!!***

Yeah, I caught that too! Then I started thinking, well, so what if younger brains have less myelination in the prefrontal lobes. What exactly does that mean anyway? It has less build up because it's younger, but it could be like plaque in arteries. I don't know much about myelination, and the article didn't say much about it, except that it could be the reason teenagers do things without thinking first.

I agree, bad science, and bad article all around. I was disappointed that NPR would put out such an article!





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

Regardless of the article's details, I do think there must be
something natural and adaptive about wanting to move away. It doesn't
mean there's something wrong with kids who don't move away, or
cultures in which it's not as common, but it does seem the natural and
sensible thing, at some point, for a young adult to get up and explore
the greater world.

Sandra

Joanna

> Yeah, I caught that too! Then I started thinking, well, so what if younger brains have less myelination in the prefrontal lobes. What exactly does that mean anyway? It has less build up because it's younger, but it could be like plaque in arteries. I don't know much about myelination, and the article didn't say much about it, except that it could be the reason teenagers do things without thinking first.

Lol--myelination is generally a good thing--it's the stuff that the brain forms when we make connections. It becomes like shorthand for the brain to send signals around. The more myelination, the denser and wider the range of thinking. The catch is that things that are new to the brain are what cause this process to happen.

The downside, I believe, is that we can get locked into ways of thinking that we want to change--like ruts in a road. For example, we have to break it up and form new connections when we learn something new, like unschooling. But then the process of "really getting it" will be expressed in our brains with heavier pathways of myelination--when we can function on autopilot in making new and better choices.

I think less myelination just means that mentors are useful--but I don't think that's any different for teens than it is for adults. I look for mentors when I want to learn something new. I think this "science" might be a case for teens getting out into the real world where they can seek out the mentors they want and create the myelination patterns that will be useful in their/our lives--NOT for locking them up with teachers with each other and being infanticized. Remember--new experiences and thoughts develop our brain--not the same old same old.

If you follow the conclusions about brains in this article, then high school is like brain jail!!

The problem with the myelination process that they don't address is the fact that the brain will do whatever it is that a person does with their brain. It's designed to adapt to whatever it is that is being done. So there we have our young adults institutionally doing virtually nothing!! At the best, they are doing what they are told, and not causing trouble--at the worst, very little. No wonder they are, in general, angry and restless and finding other things to do!

As Dr. Ian Malcolm said in Jurassic Park, "No, I'm simply saying that life, uh... finds a way."

Joanna

Joanna

Neither is better than the other, the stages a person's brain goes through, is necessary to how humans survive.
>
> Scapegoating a teenagers brain, to come up with conclusions as to why they do "dumb" things, leaves little understanding of why people's brains DO do what they do.

Right!! It seems to me that the whole anti-teen, let's figure out what's organically wrong with them vibe has put so much judgment into the picture that is entirely inappropriate in a "scientific" setting! Like it's so inconceivable that we could look at the science and realize that our culture is doing something wrong with our teens. No--we need to find research that supports that culture is right, and then teens are wrong. Like younger kids and needing medication to tolerate school.

Joanna

Sandra Dodd

-=-No--we need to find research that supports that culture is right,
and then teens are wrong. Like younger kids and needing medication to
tolerate school.-=-

I shuddered when I read that; seriously, a little chill went down me.

These young kids being drugged, and these villified teens, when
they're grown will defend the culture they have *finally* been
handed. The more they had to suffer to get there, the more they will
want to justify the world in some way that makes their suffering
worthwhile. And the more they've suffered, with the promise that
someday they'll understand and someday they'll do the same things
"for" their children, the more focus they might have on passing it on
to the next generation.

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jenny Cyphers

***Lol--myelination is generally a good thing--it's the stuff that the brain forms when we make connections. It becomes like shorthand for the brain to send signals around. The more myelination, the denser and wider the range of thinking. The catch is that things that are new to the brain are what cause this process to happen. ***

I just did a short little bit of research about it because of this whole conversation! I guess I'm getting some more myelination!

***NOT for locking them up with teachers with each other and being infanticized.***

I'm pretty sure you meant infantalized, although, for some kids, being locked up with teachers might certainly feel like a certain kind of death!

***So there we have our young adults institutionally doing virtually nothing!! At the best, they are doing what they are told, and not causing trouble--at the worst, very little. No wonder they are, in general, angry and restless and finding other things to do!***

Right! Meanwhile, while Chamille may be doing virtually nothing, that nothingness has it's own purpose for her, so probably not much nothingness going on. The upside is that her learning connections are NOT connected with anger and frustration.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Robin Bentley

> -=-No--we need to find research that supports that culture is right,
> and then teens are wrong. Like younger kids and needing medication to
> tolerate school.-=-
>
> I shuddered when I read that; seriously, a little chill went down me.

It had the same effect on me. It made me think about research that
starts with a hypothesis to prove; the conclusions are designed to
support "the way we do things and the way things are." It makes me
wonder who funds such research and what they gain from the conclusions
(and frankly, why research is done that way). It's kinda creepy.
>
> These young kids being drugged, and these villified teens, when
> they're grown will defend the culture they have *finally* been
> handed. The more they had to suffer to get there, the more they will
> want to justify the world in some way that makes their suffering
> worthwhile. And the more they've suffered, with the promise that
> someday they'll understand and someday they'll do the same things
> "for" their children, the more focus they might have on passing it on
> to the next generation.
>
It's the same with the defenders of spanking and punishment, isn't it?
Justification of their suffering: "I turned out alright."

Robin B.